Bill and Hillary Clinton on their wedding day in 1975

A formal complaint has been filed with the U.S. Senate Ethics Committee over the refusal by the Foreign Relations Committee to investigate a wide range of scandals, including “Chinagate” and “Filegate,” in Sen. Hillary Clinton’s past while she was questioned for her appointment to secretary of state.

Larry Klayman, known for pursuing Clinton scandals in the 1990s as founder of the government watchdog Judicial Watch, filed the complaint after the Foreign Relations Committee ignored his request.

“I hereby file an ethics complaint against Senator John Kerry and Senator Richard Lugar and the other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee concerning their failure to conduct an investigation into the demonstrable unethical history of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton,” said Klayman’s letter, addressed to Sens. Barbara Boxer and John Cornyn of the Select Committee on Ethics.

The ethics committee did not respond to WND’s request for comment.

Klayman said his request to be allowed to testify regarding Clinton’s nomination by President-elect Barack Obama was the basis for the complaint.

“More importantly, the Congressional Record is clear that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee abdicated its responsibility in not conducting a thorough investigation into the qualifications of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as the nominee for Secretary of State,” he wrote.

“The failure to conduct an investigation of Senator Clinton’s past history of scandal is yet another example of the so-called Senate Club, which protects and furthers the interests of its own members at the expense of the American people,” he continued. “While one would hope that your committee would open an investigation of this matter, I will not wait. …”

“I am available to meet with you should you do the unexpected and carry out your ethical duties,” he said.

“In the interim, perhaps you and your staff can review the final report of independent counsel Robert Ray, who found that Senator Clinton had lied under oath, but he chose not to indict on the grounds that he did not think a District of Columbia jury would convict. The standard of proof for an ethics investigation is much lower than for a criminal proceeding, as you know,” Klayman wrote.

Klayman to this day remains the attorney of record in at least one pending dispute that accuses Hillary Clinton of involvement in her husband’s apparently illegal release of individuals’ White House files protected by the Privacy Act.

His earlier request to be allowed to address the committee noted, “The American people deserve to have full knowledge about Senator Clinton’s role in these scandals before the committee votes to confirm her, and I am the most knowledgeable person to testify on these issues.”

But he got no response from senators.

“We need to scream right now,” Klayman told WND regarding Clinton’s nomination for secretary of state. “She was the mastermind behind ‘ChinaGate’ and ‘Filegate.'”

In the Chinagate scandal, documented on the Judicial Watch website, technology companies allegedly made donations of millions of dollars to various Democratic Party entities, including President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign, in return for permission to sell high-tech secrets to China.

Bernard Schwartz and his Loral Space & Communication Ltd. later allegedly “helped China to identify the cause of [a rocket failure], thereby advancing China’s missile program and threatening U.S. national security.”

“Filegate” developed when President Clinton and Hillary Clinton were accused of violating the privacy rights of their perceived political enemies by wrongly accessing and misusing the FBI files of Reagan and George H.W. Bush administration staffers, among others.

“In an effort to discredit the women who charged President Clinton with sexual misconduct, personal files and papers were illegally obtained and released. The courts found, under the Privacy Act, that privacy of Linda Tripp and Kathleen Willey had been violated,” a Judicial Watch report said, citing just a few of the more than 900 files involved.

Judicial Watch said Mrs. Clinton had been linked “directly to the center” of the controversy.

“During the 1990s and thereafter, as chairman of Judicial Watch and later as chairman of Freedom Watch, I investigated and filed civil lawsuits against both Bill and Hillary Clinton,” Klayman wrote. “In this regard, I am the only lawyer ever to have obtained a court ruling that former President Bill Clinton committed a crime when he illegally released the Privacy Act protected White House files of Kathleen Willey, a woman he was accused of sexually harassing in the Oval Office.

“The finding was made by the Honorable Royce C. Lamberth in a case styled Alexander vs. FBI et. al, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia,” he wrote. “Importantly, this case, in which Hillary Clinton remains a principal defendant, is still pending to this day. It concerns the illegal obtaining and use of FBI files for political purposes.”

Klayman wrote that he also was counsel of record in the case Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Commerce, in which Hillary Clinton “was implicated in orchestrating the illegal sale of seats on trade missions during the former Clinton administration.”

WND previously has reported other instances of alleged unethical behavior by Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, with chief counsel John Doar (left), bringing impeachment charges against President Nixon before the House Judiciary Committee in 1974

The chief Republican counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during the preparation of impeachment articles against President Richard Nixon has verified allegations by Jerry Zeifman, the general counsel for the committee, about Hillary Clinton.

Franklin Polk backed up claims by Zeifman that Clinton was fired from the committee staff for unethical behavior.

Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, also called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.” He reported her legal brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Polk cited Clinton’s brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But Clinton deliberately ignored the then-recent case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970.

Other accusations against Hillary Clinton include mysteriously turning a $1,000 in investment in cattle futures into a $100,000 profit and “losing” law-billing records subpoenaed in 1994 that suddenly appeared in 1996 in a room next to her office.

Then there was Travelgate, when the staff of the White House travel office was fired to make way for Clinton cronies.

The American voters, apparently, haven’t forgotten some of the issues. In the Deseret News in Utah, readers suggested the following questions for Hillary Clinton:

  • “What favors have you doled out to the who’s who of rich international businessmen and leaders who contributed millions to former President Bill Clinton’s foundation.

  • As senator, you voted for a use-of-force resolution for Iraq. But when the war went bad and no weapons of mass destruction were found, you claimed the vote never authorized President Bush to go to war. Please tell us how you are competent to serve as top diplomat when you do not understand the wording of important legislation?
  • Why did you direct employees to transfer the secret FBI background reports on staffs of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and bring them to the White House.
  • Why did you fail to disclose $2 million in campaign contributions for your first Senate run relating to an extravagant Hollywood fundraiser?
  • What was your role in the smear campaign launched by your husband’s aides against Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones and other Bill girlfriends?

Klayman told WND he will organize opposition to the Clinton nomination on the floor of the Senate.

“The matter should be sent back to the committee for them to do their own investigation,” he said. “The Democrats have a heightened responsibility given the fact they are in control of the Senate.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.